[arin-ppml] 2-byte ASN policy

David Farmer farmer at umn.edu
Mon Apr 4 18:08:19 EDT 2016


6.10.1 and 4.4 speak to critical infrastructure.  6.10.1 has the more
concise definition and is quoted below.  4.4 has been edited, but includes
the same components, just more spread out.

    ARIN will make micro-allocations to critical infrastructure providers
of the Internet,
    including public exchange points, core DNS service providers (e.g.
ICANN-sanctioned
    root, gTLD, and ccTLD operators) as well as the RIRs and IANA.

So, I think understand the issue as they relate to internet exchanges, they
have been and are being discussed.  However, I'm not certain these issues
are as pressing for core DNS service providers, or at least any more than
any other internet edge ASN.  Could someone with experience with core DNS
comment on that issue?

So, maybe we should reserve any returned 2-byte ASN for internet exchanges
and not include core DNS.  Unless someone has a convincing argument why
this is an issue for core DNS.

Allow transfers, but any 2-byte ASNs returned to the free pool would be
reserved for internet exchanges.  Everyone else would get 4-byte ASNs out
of the free pool.  If there aren't any 2-byte ASNs available, or if they
request request one, internet exchanges would receive a 4-byte ASN.

Just an idea that I thought I would put out there.

On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Adam Thompson <athompso at athompso.net> wrote:

> (IMHO, and I know this is highly debatable but this isn't the place, BGP
> communities are a mis-feature anyway.)
>
> Regardless, reserving 2-byte ASNs for "critical infrastructure" is a good
> compromise if the restrictions mirror those for the IPv4 block also
> reserved for "critical infrastructure".
>
> -Adam
>
>
> On 2016-04-03 13:52, Ron Grant wrote:
>
> The biggest technical problem with 4-byte ASNs that I'm aware of comes
> when propagating BGP communities - AFAIK even with extended communities,
> you can't specify two 4-byte ASNs in a single community.
>
> This can be worked around when using communities for direct peering
> arrangements, as one side of the equation is static - but at a Public
> Exchange point, it can be problematic, because who knows who might want to
> connect or not connect to whom.
>
> Recently we ran into this problem when requesting an ASN for the Vancouver
> Internet Exchange (VANIX) - we were told there were no 2-byte ASNs left, so
> we went back to the drawing board to see how we could run our Route Server
> with a 4-byte ASN, and after wrestling with the problem for a few weeks,
> went back to ARIN and...joy!...someone had returned a 2-byte, which we
> obtained for the RS.
>
> IMO any future returned 2-byte ASNs should be reserved for critical
> infrastructure or special need, but I'd love to find a solution to the
> communities issue that made 2-byte ASNs "not special" anymore.
>
>
>
>
> On 2016-04-03 11:36 AM, Adam Thompson wrote:
>
> IMO, 2-byte ASNs should simply be retired and not reallocated. "Solving
> the technical problem", as described in your email, is actually ensuring
> the perpetuation of a different technical problem.
> It's the same sort of thing as the IPv4 vs IPv6 --transition, but this
> time ARIN has an opportunity to at least avoid being part of the problem,
> even if it can't really be part of the "solution".
> Let's please not prolong this problem, too... even in central Canada,
> known for a paucity of upstream carriers, it's now commercially feasible to
> work around the 2-byte technical limitations.
>
> -Adam
>
>
> On April 3, 2016 12:59:37 PM CDT, Andrew Dul <andrew.dul at quark.net>
> <andrew.dul at quark.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am starting a new thread in PPML, as a follow up to the ARIN
>> suggestion and consultation which recently started regarding creating a
>> 2-byte ASN waiting list.
>>
>> The original suggestion is here:
>> https://www.arin.net/participate/acsp/suggestions/2016-04.html
>>
>> ARIN opened a consultation on this suggestion on the arin-consult
>> mailing-list.  This thread starts here for those who are not subscribed
>> to arin-consult.
>> http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/2016-March/000713.html
>> http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/2016-April/000722.html
>>
>> As the thread evolved it has been suggested that this issue should be
>> resolved via the policy development process rather than through a
>> suggestion.
>>
>> There are a number of questions that have been raised by this thread.  I
>> am copying them here to continue the discussion on PPML.
>>
>> ===
>>
>> Working problem statement: ARIN will receive 2-byte ASNs as  returns
>> over time, and these ASNs have perceived or additional value to
>> organizations compared to 4-byte ASNs.  How should ARIN allocate these
>> 2-byte ASNs?
>>
>> ===
>>
>> Should they be given to the next requester, regardless of technical need
>> for a 2-byte ASN? (What are the technical qualifications we should use
>> if there is a specific technical need?  e.g. provides transit to more
>> than 1 ASN?)
>>
>> If there is really a technical need for 2-byte ASNs, shouldn't we
>> attempt to build an inventory of 2-byte ASNs?
>>
>> Should returns be held in reserve?
>>
>> Should ARIN hold them for some period of
>>   time
>> before reallocating them?
>>
>> Should they be put up for auction to  qualified organizations?
>>
>> Should they be given to the 1st organization  on a wait-list for 2-byte
>> ASNs?
>>
>> Would an organization looking for a 2-byte ASN have the option to
>> receive a 4-byte ASN in the interim?  If they did would they have to
>> return it?
>>
>> Should the waiting list be closed to organizations that already have a
>> 2-byte ASNs?
>>
>> I and the AC would appreciate your comments on these questions so that
>> we can start to build a draft policy that best matches with what the
>> community would like to see implemented by ARIN.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> PPML
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>>
>> -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
> --
> Ron Grant                             Managed DSL/Cable/Wireless/Fibre
> Skyway West Business Internet          Internet and Private Networkingrgrant at skywaywest.com                  Bonding and Fail Over Solutions
> cell: 604-737-2113              Virtual Data Centre and Private Clouds
> direct: 604-484-5263                         http://www.skywaywest.com
>
> Sales, Support and Billing    http://www.skywaywest.com/contact-us.htm
> ca.linkedin.com/in/obiron
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>



-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20160404/1c28980d/attachment.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list